Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	peter_n	successor_n	2,335	5	9.6117	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35021	The legacy of the Right Reverend Father in God, Herbert, Lord Bishop of Hereford, to his diocess, or, A short determination of all controversies we have with the papists, by Gods holy word	Croft, Herbert, 1603-1691.	1679 (1679)	Wing C6966; ESTC R1143	85,065	144

beseech you tell me from whence sprang this mighty Headship of the Pope to be Lord of the whole World Successors as Successors can challenge no more Authority than their Predecessors had If the present Bishop of Salisbury hath no Authority over the Bishop of Lincoln certainly Salisburies Successor can have none over Lincolns Successor And so Saint Peter having no Lordship over S. Iohn nor any other Apostle Peter's Successor can have none over their Successors this is clear How then Did Christ ever come again upon Earth to establish this Headship or Did an Angel come from Heaven to do it Though I must tell you should an Angel come from Heaven and preach any other Doctrine than what is in Scripture we are fully warranted not to receive it But if neither Christ nor Angel nor any one Scripture declare this Headship is it not a most unreasonable thing to require us to believe this as a matter absolutely necessary to Salvation and to believe it with as full assurance as we believe Christ was born of the Virgin or that Christ was Crucified and that he rose from the dead Let them shew us then in such plain Scripture words that the Pope is to be Head of the Church that the Church of Rome shall be Infallible unto the worlds end that we are to receive all her Doctrines as the Oracles of God or that in the Church of Rome we have Eternal Life Let them but shew us some promise some command plain like this and we shall readily submit really we should be heartily glad to see it it would save us much trouble But beloved you all know there is nothing like this in all the Scripture How then dare any man venture the eternal salvation of his Soul and in obedience to the Church of Rome practise things so apparently contrary to Gods Commands as to worship Images pray unto Saints receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in one kind and such like as I mentioned formerly I know there are in the writings of several Fathers many expressions which highly magnifie the Authority of the Church in general and some for the Church of Rome in particular all which signifie very little if you consider the circumstances and motives for their so speaking When the Church was infested with Heresies the Orthodox Fathers disputing with them used all the Arguments they could to reduce them to the Truth but perverse men not hearkening to their reasons their last and pressing Argument was the Authority of the Church which they set forth with great lustre to make the Argument more powerful and force their submission unto it And because the generality of the Church in those days by Gods blessing was not yet infected with errors they urged the Authority and true belief of the Universal Church to reclaim the particular Heretical Churches from their Error and the most general Language being then Greek they used the word Catholick which in that Language signifies Universal and hence arose the phrase of the Catholick Church Moreover it pleased God to preserve the Roman Church in the true Faith with great Zeal and Piety for many years their Bishops being successively Martyr'd by the Heathen Emperors and their Officers at Rome And their true Faith being celebrated also in Scripture by S. Paul it was magnified by the true believing Fathers of other Churches as Antioch Ephesus Constantinople Alexandria c. that it might the more move the Heretical Members of their Churches to conform unto it telling them how S. Peter and S. Paul the two great Pillars of the Church were Martyr'd there and therefore they ought to believe no Error could enter that Church which was so sanctified with the blood of those two great Apostles and divers other famous Martyrs All which they uttered with great zeal that they might make the unbelievers to reverence it the more and submit unto it As when two of our Lawyers differ in opinion he that hath the Lord Chief Justice Coke on his side will magnifie him as such an Oracle of the Law that could not err and say all that his wit can invent to set it forth it doth not therefore follow that he seriously thinks Coke to have been infallible no more do these sayings of the Fathers conclude the Roman Church to be infallible as I shall now shew you by one Example sufficient to satisfie any man without farther trouble S. Cyprian was a Bishop and Martyr of the true Catholick Church as famous for Learning and Sanctity as for his Faith and Martyrdom he wrote a zealous Tract for the unity of the Church wherein he uttered those sayings which the Papists have so frequently in their mouths Habere non potest Deum Patrem qui Ecclesiam non habet Matrem he cannot have God for his Father who will not have the Church for his Mother And As no man was saved out of Noah ' s Ark so no man can be saved out of the Church Which being spoken by so great a man seem to carry great Authority with them But if I might freely speak my mind I would say of them that they are fine flourishing sentences sounding handsomely to the ear but cannot much satisfie a mans reason unless he had clearly exprest what he means by the word Ecclesia Church I know full well what the Papists mean by it they mean the Bishop of Rome and his Clergy and all those that are of his Faith and Communion and believe that no man can be saved that is not in that Communion And this is with them the Mother Church and Noah's Ark. But I shall now plainly shew that S. Cyprian meant no such thing for in the beginning of this Tract he declares that St. Peter whom the Papists would needs have to be the Founder of their Church had no Authority over the rest of the Apostles and Churches founded by them but that all the Apostles were of equal honour and authority Pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis Which saying he fully confirmed by his practice which is the clearest exposition of a mans meaning for a great dispute arising between him and Stephen the Bishop of Rome about Rebaptizing those which were Christned in Heretical Churches S. Cyprian declared his Judgment was for Rebaptizing Stephen declares the contrary and both parties adhering stifly to their own opinions the dispute grew so high that Cyprian held a Council of all the African Bishops and there Decreed that they ought to be Rebaptized for there being but one Baptism which was to be had only in the true Church the Heretical Baptism being done out of the true Church was no Baptism Here 't is plain S. Cyprian meant by the word Church his Church and all that were in Communion with him Stephen on the other side calls a Council at Rome and there Decrees that the Heretical Baptism being performed in due manner though the Priest Baptizing were an Heretick out of the Church yet the Baptism

of Truth and the way of Error the way of Godliness and the way of Iniquity the way of Life and the way of Death I most humbly and most earnestly beseech our most Gracious God for his Son Christ Iesus's sake to give you a right understanding in all things and to preserve you continually in the way of Truth Holiness Righteousness and Life Everlasting Amen THE END A SUPPLEMENT To the PRECEDING SERMONS TOGETHER WITH A TRACT concerning the Holy Sacrament OF THE Lords Supper Promised in the PREFACE By the Right Reverend Father in God HERBERT Lord Bishop of HEREFORD London Printed for Charles Harper 1679. A SUPPLEMENT To the Preceding SERMONS IN the Preceding Sermons I have proved these six things 1. That by God's special appointment all persons are to read and learn the Scriptures for their Edification in Faith and good Life and therefore 't is both foolish and impious for vain Man to take upon him to give reasons why the People should not read them 2. The reason of this because that in the Scriptures we have eternal life as our Saviour tells us which St. Paul explicates more particularly saying That they make us wise unto salvation that is they teach us all things necessary for our belief and they throughly furnish us unto all good works that is they teach us all things requisite for good life And these things the Scriptures compleatly contain in themselves without any Humane Doctrines so that if there were no other Writings nor Instructions in the World but the Scriptures alone yet we should not want any thing necessary to eternal life 3. That we are not to believe any thing with Divine Faith but what is clearly contained in Scripture for such a belief is a Duty belonging to God alone and 't is the greatest and most acceptable Duty and Sacrifice we can perform unto God to captivate our understandings in Obedience to Faith in God and therefore to give this principal Divine Service unto Man is high Idolatry and consequently to believe in the Apostles themselves had been great Idolatry had not Christ fully assured us That they should have the Holy Ghost to guide them into all Truth So that to speak properly we do not believe in the Apostles and Prophets but in God the Holy Ghost speaking in them And for this reason we find St. Paul very wary in distinguishing and declaring to the people what he delivered as from the Lord and what he delivered as from himself though he was perswaded he had the Spirit of the Lord even in that But yet no clear and full assurance that it was spoken directly by the Lord. Nay our blessed Saviour himself though God and Man yet would not have us believe in him as Man and therefore assures us That the words he spake were not his but the Father's speaking by him 4. I have proved that we have not any clear and full assurance from God That any Assembly of Men or Church since the Apostles are infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost into all Truth and therefore to believe in any Assembly of Men or Church without this full assurance of the Holy Ghost's speaking in them is Idolatry also for by such a belief you pay them the greatest Divine Worship 5. Though we should grant That some promise of Infallibility were made in Scripture to the Church yet this must include the Laity as well as the Clergy for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate Church is always set in Scripture for the Congregation of the Faithful and is not once set for the Clergy distinct from the Laity But there is no such thing as Infallibility granted to any neither Priests nor People nor both together 6. Grant yet farther that the word Church in Scripture should signifie the Clergy and a promise of Infallibility made to them as Successors to the Apostles yet the same Promise being made and the same Authority given to all the Apostles alike the Successor of St. Peter and his Clergy cannot from hence challenge any more Infallibility than the Successors of the other Apostles with their Clergy and Church But the Papists deny this Infallibility to other Churches Certainly then other Churches may as well deny it to them All these things I have proved But now for a fuller conviction of the Papists and perchance for better satisfaction to some others I have a mind to grant yet farther That Christ made some particular Promise to St. Peter above the other Apostles yea and to St. Peter's Successors also 't is impossible from Scripture to prove either of these but let it pass so let us now see how the Papists can from hence fix this Infallibility to the Bishop of Rome and his Churches For I have shewed you from Scripture which doubtless is of better Authority than any Writings the Papists can bring for St. Peter that Rome was comprised in St. Paul's Jurisdiction and that he lived and preached and suffered there But we will pass over this also and yield to St. Peter's Jurisdiction over the whole World What then Then St. Peter was Bishop of Rome and setled his Successor there And how do the Papists prove this They answer that many authentick Historians tell them so is this all their Proof Humane Testimony from History is this a sufficient foundation for a prime Article of Faith on which depends the Salvation of all Christian Souls Is this a sure Rock or rather a bank of Sand to build their Infallibility upon Do not the same Historians relate that St. Peter was Bishop of Antioch and we have more reason to believe History for this because the Scripture tells us he was there but not one tittle of his ever being at Rome but strong Presumptions to the contrary St. Luke in the Acts speaking so much of St. Paul's going thither hath not one word of St. Peter's who being as the Papists believe so eminent an Apostle above all the rest seems somewhat neglected by St. Luke which makes me suspect St. Luke was not of their Opinion And shall we accuse St. Paul also for want of charity or civility never to mention St. Peter in all those his particular and numerous Salutations to and from others in his Epistles we must not think that their quarrel at Antioch where St. Paul withstood St. Peter stuck so long in his mind as to omit all Salutation to him in several Epistles We ought rather in charity to St. Paul to believe St. Peter was not at Rome And truly methinks the Papists themselves who pretend so much to honour St. Peter do him no small dishonour in affirming him to be at Rome when St. Paul answered for himself before Nero the first time St. Paul complaining that no man stood with him but all forsook him And if those Historians which the Papists rely on for St. Peter's being Bishop of Rome speak true in the circumstance of time then he was at Rome when St. Paul first answered

before Nero And who would not rather distrust these Historians than believe St. Peter forsook St. Paul when he answered before Nero. Certainly whoever considers well all these weighty circumstances from Scripture may think them more ponderous than the Relation of Historians for his being Bishop there so many years In which Matter if the first Historian was mistaken others that wrote after perchance to save themselves the trouble of confuting him and not fore-seeing any evil consequence arising thence followed that track and so the Error ran on too far to be corrected For my own part though I will not gainsay the Historians yet I must needs gainsay the Papists That History-Relation cannot be a sufficient ground for so principal an Article of Faith especially seeing the Scripture-Circumstances are so much against it And they that will give full credit to Historians in this must consequently believe the same Historians affirming That St. Peter was first Bishop at Antioch that zealous City which first took up that glorious but then dangerous Name of Christians And is it not a disparagement to St. Peter that he like old doting Lovers should so much prefer his second Wife before his first as to bequeath this his inestimable Jewel of Infallibility to her May not St. Peter be accused as Ephesus was Rev. 2. 4. to have left his first Love Truly I will not so rashly accuse St. Peter neither will I so rashly yield unto the Romanists this Infallibility damning us all that will not sacrifice our Souls and idolize it I think I comply fairly in yielding that St. Peter had some pre-eminence above other Apostles and that he was Bishop of Rome but that he gave all that he had to his second Wife and nothing to his first so great partiality I will never yield to but require them to prove it by producing St. Peter's Will which I never yet could see nor ever yet fully understood whom St. Peter appointed his first Successor at Rome to whom he bequeathed this inestimable Legacy The Papists themselves cannot agree upon it some say Clemens some Linus some Cletus Are we not then at a rare pass for St. Peter's infallible Successor when they cannot assure us who was the first to whom St. Peter gave this Infallibility For ought I know this Jewel might be lost in the scuffle and so none of them had it Moreover finding the Papists so uncertain in so prime a Matter makes me to doubt other things also And therefore I farther require to see the form of St. Peter's establishment for his Successors For this is a clear Case That in the election of any Officer if the fundamental Rules of Election be not observed the Election is void Let us then see the form of St. Peter's establishment for the election of his Successors The principal Authors that relate St. Peter Bishop of Rome affirm That he nominated Clemens for his Successor And it seems this Story ran for truth for they who will needs have Linus to be the first Successor are forc'd to salve up their Story by saying That Clemens out of modesty would not accept of it and so Linus was put up and after Linus's death Clemens came in So that we are not only ignorant who was St. Peter's Successor but by what Authority also he succeeded for it seems St. Peter's Authority was not obeyed but another came in and how he came in is also uncertain and which way soever he came in I would know who gave them Authority that did put him in If St. Peter gave it not as it seems he did not but named his own Successor who gave it Or were they violent Intruders without Authority And if they were no lawful Electors sure he was no lawful Successor and so for ought I can see the Church of Rome is at a great loss for infallible Successor to St. Peter But which way soever this Business was carried at first 't is evident that t is carried clean otherwise now For at first either St. Peter named his Successor as most probable in Reason and by History also or he was chosen by the Clergy alone as many think for that Custom seems to have continued a while in the Church the People being but few and bearing wonderful Reverence to their Pastors were wholly governed by them in all things Or he was chosen by the Clergy and People both for after the People were grown numerous they grew also factious and would not receive such Pastors as the Clergy elected unless they also approved them taking upon themselves a share in the Election And this was so generally practised in all Churches that at length he was not allowed a lawful Pastor that was not thus chosen Now which way of all these St. Peter's Successor was chosen at first and afterwards for hundreds of years this is evident That the Election now is quite otherwise than it was for many hundred years for now he is chosen by a select company of Cardinals an Order of Clergy never heard of in former Ages all created by Popes some in Favour to their Kindred some in Faction to keep up their Party in Rome some in Policy to get interest with foreign Princes creating their Relations as fit for Clergy-men as St. Peter was for a Courtier and these are the gallant Men that must chuse us an infallible Successor to St. Peter whereas doubtless St. Peter would abhor such spruce delicate effeminate Clergy I will say no worse of them though the World talks loud things of another-guess nature But let these Men be what they will in their Lives I look upon them to be in no Authority for Election not being instituted by St. Peter nor conformed to the primitive practice the Election being then as before related either by all the Clergy no Bishop being excluded as now or by all the Clergy and People both Moreover put the case these Cardinals should be divided in their Election and set up several Popes as they have done who remained so several years therefore may many more whose Infallibility then must we rely on If you tell me this may happen how-ever he be chosen pardon me not if he be chosen and nominated by his Predecessor as in all probability and best of History St. Peters Successor was But it may be again replied That the Predecessor may die a sudden death and then we are to seek or if other Bishops chuse him they may be divided or if Clergy and People are to make the Election they also may be dis-joynted and divided and thus we are to seek as well as in the Cardinal's Division All this is true and for all these probable confusions I cannot think God left his Church in this confused manner so as doubting Souls cannot tell to whom to make their address to be resolved in Matters of Salvation Again their Council of Florence determined and declared That the intention of the Minister is requisite to the effect of every Sacrament